Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel

Yevamot (1:4) | Yaron Gottlieb | 13 years ago

At the end of the first chapter of Yevamot we get an insight into the
unique relationship that existed between Beit Hillel and Beit
Shammai and a clearer understanding of what the Mishnah in Avot
means when it describes the argument for the sake of heaven as being the
dispute between Hillel and Shammai. The exact nature of the dispute
gives us a clear directive as to how we should conduct our own
disagreements.

The last Mishnah in the first chapter of Yevamot brings a dispute
between the two houses of study which on the surface is quite
astonishing. The Mishnah leaves us with a catch twenty-two where
someone who acts in accordance with Beit Hillel would be forbidden to
marry a Kohen according to Beit Shammai, while if the reverse action
was taken and the opinion of Beit Shammai was followed the child would
be a mamzer according to Beit Hillel. Nevertheless “Beit Shammai
did not refrain from marrying women from Beit Hillel, and neither did
Beit Hillel refrain from Beit Shammai.” The continuation is that
they also ate from each other’s houses in spite of the differing
opinions with regards to ritual purity.

On the surface this is both shocking and to a certain degree highly
utopian. It appears that Chazal were willing to forgo their Halachic
decisions for the sake of Jewish unity - a statement that does not hold
up to scrutiny in the Gemara. It would certainly have many
ramifications to the structure of Halacha today if this would be true.

In the Yerushalmi (Kidushin 1:1 and here in Yevamot) it seems to
suggest that while they were not conciliatory towards each others
position it was accepted that they had differing positions. Not much was
done about this situation1 until the heavenly voice came down and
stated clearly that everyone must follow the opinion of Beit Hillel,
which effectively ended the debate as a practical concern.

The Yerushalmi then gives us Yavneh as the location of the
Sanhedrin when the heavenly voice was heard. This strange additional
piece of information seems to tell us something extra. Yavneh was the
central seat of Jewish learning immediately following the destruction of
the temple as was requested by Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai (see Gittin
55b). It is a symbol of the new age Torah of the exile. It is at this
point that the vibrant debate and the way of life that existed prior to
the destruction came to be redefined by the heavenly voice for the
thousands of years of the exile.

This way of thinking however is not actually the answer given by the
Bavli (Yevamot 14a) as well as the commentators, who unanimously
follow that direction. The Gemara says that due to the massive
ramifications of the two cases (having children who are mamzerim in
the first and the defiling of the sacrifices in the second) they clearly
would not blindly intermarry. Instead each school would inform the other
of a relationship that they knew the other school would find
questionable. The Gemara therefore simply says that instead of putting
a blanket ban on the other house they had a series of checks to
determine the persons status according to their opinion, as they would
readily volunteer information about any vessel whose purity is suspect
according to the view of their rivals.

This gives us a clear look at a true dispute for the sake of heaven. In
spite of differences of opinion, there is still room to recognise a
difference of opinion and that this view is also the word of G-d – “Both
these and these are the words of the living G-d.” At the end of the day
they were both strong in their own views but were able to recognise the
opposing position and were comfortable enough in their own opinions to
be able to accommodate them in a way that would not create divisions in
the nation.

1Editor’s note: There is a debate in the Yerushalmi whether
Beit Shammai acted in accordance to Beit Hillel’s ruling acting
stringently or whether each school acted according to their own
opinion. According to the latter opinion, even though there could
have potentially been problems relating to mamzerut, the
Yerushalmi explains that these cases never existed - "המקום משמר
ולא אירע מעשה מעולם"